February 27, 2004

The wee folk, the little people...

Since I've been calling people "partisan midgets," I thought I ought to justify myself a bit and say why I think I shouldn't be called a "midget of the ultraconservatives" or some such.

Firstly, I have some general principles and ideas on the direction I think America and the world ought to be moving in. And I try to make them clear to readers, so I can be criticized if I'm inconsistent. And I try hard to be consistent. For instance, I'm openly a free-trader, and therefore I have to give Clinton high marks for NAFTA, and I've criticized Bush for the Steel Tariffs. Likewise, I'm a Wilsonian interventionist, and my support for Iraq, (and my contempt for bogus "International Law,") is extended to also supporting Clinton's equally "illegal" intervention in Bosnia. (I didn't pay much attention at the time, having no blog to sharpen my wits, but I remember hearing Rush Limbaugh complaining that we had no vital national interest in Bosnia, and thinking, "Screw it, lets do it! No one's gonna fix this if we don't.")

Midgets abandon their principles if it means agreeing with somebody they don't like. Such as the lefty waterflies who used to criticize the Taliban, and Moslem intolerance of women and gays�until the minute that put them alongside Bush.

Nothing brings on my contempt like pundits who don't reveal the general ideas behind their words�it's almost impossible to pin them down on inconsistencies. Nothing arouses my sneers like having to guess where someone is really coming from. (Of course I may be unfair sometimes, when I criticize a single blogpost without being familiar with a person's other work�they may have clear and consistent principles I'm not aware of.) Lowest of the midgets are those like Josh Marshall, whose guiding principle is "Republicans bad. Democrats good."

And in areas where I don't have my philosophy worked out, such as Immigration or Gay Marriage, I usually keep my mouth shut, though I'm sorely tempted to skewer lefty hypocrisies. (I did once comment on Gay Marriage here with follow-up here)

And the people I would tend to refer to as Partisan Lilliputians won't debate! They make some assertion, I answer with a long list of facts and opinions and sophistries, and the cowardly weasels scurry away (and then make the same assertion a week later, with the blasé air of one stating something that's been generally accepted and is past the point of needing defense!) Slytherins!

By the way, is there a technical term in the lexicon of logical disputation for someone picking out and demolishing one small error in a long argument, and then walking away slapping the dust off their hands and acting as if they have won a "debate," and there's nothing more to say? That kind of debate I do get.

Actually, though I long for rational debate, I suspect many of those I criticize are like those lefty columnists last year, remember them? The ones who wrote those WHY I HATE BUSH columns? "I hate the way he walks. I hate the way he talks. The curve of his earlobe makes me want to disembowel myself with a red-hot putty knife..." O-KAY. Do not rattle the cage, folks...It might hurt itself dashing against the bars.

Posted by John Weidner at February 27, 2004 9:58 AM
Weblog by John Weidner